Evaluation of the Video Ocular Counter-Roll (vOCR) as a New Clinical Test of Otolith Function in Peripheral Vestibulopathy

The head impulse test (HIT) is a useful bedside test to identify peripheral vestibular deficits. However, such a deficit of the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) may not be diagnosed because corrective saccades cannot always be detected by simple observation. The scleral search coil technique is the gold standard for HIT measurements, but it is not practical for routine testing or for acute patients, because they are required to wear an uncomfortable contact lens. To develop an easy-to-use video HIT system (vHIT) as a clinical tool for identifying peripheral vestibular deficits. To validate the diagnostic accuracy of vHIT by simultaneous measures with video and search coil recordings across healthy subjects and patients with a wide range of previously identified peripheral vestibular deficits. Horizontal HIT was recorded simultaneously with vHIT (250 Hz) and search coils (1,000 Hz) in 8 normal subjects, 6 patients with vestibular neuritis, 1 patient after unilateral intratympanic gentamicin, and 1 patient with bilateral gentamicin vestibulotoxicity. Simultaneous video and search coil recordings of eye movements were closely comparable (average concordance correlation coefficient r(c) = 0.930). Mean VOR gains measured with search coils and video were not significantly different in normal (p = 0.107) and patients (p = 0.073). With these groups, the sensitivity and specificity of both the reference and index test were 1.0 (95% confidence interval 0.69-1.0). vHIT measures detected both overt and covert saccades as accurately as coils. The video head impulse test is equivalent to search coils in identifying peripheral vestibular deficits but easier to use in clinics, even in patients with acute vestibular neuritis. Show more

In 1988, we introduced impulsive testing of semicircular canal (SCC) function measured with scleral search coils and showed that it could accurately and reliably detect impaired function even of a single lateral canal. Later we showed that it was also possible to test individual vertical canal function in peripheral and also in central vestibular disorders and proposed a physiological mechanism for why this might be so. For the next 20 years, between 1988 and 2008, impulsive testing of individual SCC function could only be accurately done by a few aficionados with the time and money to support scleral search-coil systems—an expensive, complicated and cumbersome, semi-invasive technique that never made the transition from the research lab to the dizzy clinic. Then, in 2009 and 2013, we introduced a video method of testing function of each of the six canals individually. Since 2009, the method has been taken up by most dizzy clinics around the world, with now close to 100 refereed articles in PubMed. In many dizzy clinics around the world, video Head Impulse Testing has supplanted caloric testing as the initial and in some cases the final test of choice in patients with suspected vestibular disorders. Here, we consider seven current, interesting, and controversial aspects of video Head Impulse Testing: (1) introduction to the test; (2) the progress from the head impulse protocol (HIMPs) to the new variant—suppression head impulse protocol (SHIMPs); (3) the physiological basis for head impulse testing; (4) practical aspects and potential pitfalls of video head impulse testing; (5) problems of vestibulo-ocular reflex gain calculations; (6) head impulse testing in central vestibular disorders; and (7) to stay right up-to-date—new clinical disease patterns emerging from video head impulse testing. With thanks and appreciation we dedicate this article to our friend, colleague, and mentor, Dr Bernard Cohen of Mount Sinai Medical School, New York, who since his first article 55 years ago on compensatory eye movements induced by vertical SCC stimulation has become one of the giants of the vestibular world. Show more

In addition to activating cochlear receptors, air conducted sound (ACS) and bone conducted vibration (BCV) activate vestibular otolithic receptors, as shown by neurophysiological evidence from animal studies--evidence which is the foundation for using ACS and BCV for clinical vestibular testing by means of vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs). Recent research is elaborating the specificity of ACS and BCV on vestibular receptors. The evidence that saccular afferents can be activated by ACS has been mistakenly interpreted as showing that ACS only activates saccular afferents. That is not correct - ACS activates both saccular and utricular afferents, just as BCV activates both saccular and utricular afferents, although the patterns of activation for ACS and BCV do not appear to be identical. The otolithic input to sternocleidomastoid muscle appears to originate predominantly from the saccular macula. The otolithic input to the inferior oblique appears to originate predominantly from the utricular macula. Galvanic stimulation by surface electrodes on the mastoids very generally activates afferents from all vestibular sense organs. This review summarizes the physiological results, the potential artifacts and errors of logic in this area, reconciles apparent disagreements in this field. The neurophysiological results on BCV have led to a new clinical test of utricular function - the n10 of the oVEMP. The cVEMP tests saccular function while the oVEMP tests utricular function. Copyright (c) 2009 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Show more